NL West Notes: Towers, Giants, Evans, Kemp, Tulowitzki

The Padres have not yet asked the Diamondbacks if they can speak with GM Kevin Towers, according to two tweets from Scott Miller of Bleacher Report (tweet one, tweet two). The Padres aren’t considering Towers as a GM candidate for their own opening. Rather, they think he can be an asset as a veteran talent evaluator. Towers is on the hot seat in Phoenix, and the Diamondbacks would allow the Padres to speak with him if they asked.

Since the Giants are only paying Jake Peavy about $2MM over the remainder of the season, they have the financial flexibility to add another player via trade, tweets Alex Pavlovic of the Mercury News. However, GM Brian Sabean says there aren’t enough players on the market right now.

Updating an earlier post, Steve Gilbert of MLB.com reportsNick Evans remains with the Diamondbacks. MLBTR reported earlier that Evans had signed with the Rakuten Golden Eagles. Talks have occurred according to Evans, but nothing is official.

The Dodgers are shopping Matt Kemp, says Jon Heyman of CBS Sports. He adds that five teams “have shown interest, or at least talked to the Dodgers.” While Kemp has received frequent playing time, other issues have boiled to the surface between club and player. Included among those is a less than “smooth” relationship with the field staff. Rival executives have heard of the same problem, which could affect his trade value. Kemp’s contract, with $117MM remaining, could also impede a deal.

In addition to Kemp, the Dodgers are focused on finding relievers to pitch the seventh and eighth innings, tweets Jim Bowden of ESPN. The Dodgers have a plethora of former closers setting up Kenley Jansen, but they’ve been less than stellar.

Rockies shortstopTroy Tulowitzki (note the “t”) does not currently have a no trade clause, learned Thomas Harding of MLB.com. If he’s traded, he’ll be owed an additional $2MM bonus from his new club and a no trade clause would then go into effect. Tulo is owed another $104MM over the next five season excluding escalators and incentives.

The biggest mistake Kemp made, as well as the Dodgers, was locking him up to that extension after that 39 HR season. I’ve heard for the last 6 years how Kemp & the Dodgers haven’t seen eye to eye (alongside Martin & Ethier), and that would’ve been a great time to sell high. How much money would the Dodgers be willing to eat of Kemp’s contract?

It was universally praised because Kemp at that time broke out into the star everyone knew he could become. I didn’t say he should’ve turned down $160 million. If you give someone $160 million, you make damn sure that you protect your star player with suffering the ravage of injuries he has suffered from coming back too soon. It’s sad to see him look like he’s made out of glass.

So Kemp and the coaching staff have been at odds for a long time. Why don’t they all just sit down and try to work that out? Of course, going public doesn’t help, but still. Whether they trade Kemp or not, what does it hurt to try to smooth things over? There’s obviously communication problems and it doesn’t matter who’s at fault. It’s bad PR to let it go on.

I think this “at odds” thing is being blown out of proportion. Most of the actual quotes from Kemp himself amount to “I want to play,” which isn’t exactly a terrible thing for a player to say and want.The really funny part to me is the rumors of him going to Boston, probably the most hypersensitive fan and media city in all of baseball. Who doesn’t know that Kemp would be eaten alive in Boston?

Kemp to Seattle. It’s the only logical move. Jack’s job is on the line, the M’s have more than enough players to choose from and trade, and they’re one of the only teams that who are able to (desperate enough), but shouldn’t take on such a big contract even if the Dodgers eat some of the salary.

While I would certainly love to see that bat come to Seattle, the question is cost, both money and players. With the money owed to Felix & Cano, there is no way the M’s can do that without a sizable chunk of cash coming along with him. Plus I don’t want to gut the farm for one player.

The only way it makes them a better team is if they receive a prospect haul in return. They only way that happens is if they eat all of his contract and even then what kind of prospects are we talking about? Nothing that is going to make a difference this year.

Yup, and without Kemp, the heart of the lineup is all lefties except for Puig, and the only other outfielder coming up is also a lefty. If that happened, and I’m an opposing manager, I would say thank you very much.

Why do you assume they would only get prospects for Kemp? There are teams with solid major league talent that could trade with the Dodgers. Sure some of the players would be prospects, but not all. Admittedly the best time for this sort of deal would be in the offseason, you have to agree something has to give with the outfield situation in LA.

I think the issue is whether teams feel confident that Kemp can regain a semblance of his old self. If so, then arguably he should not be traded. If not then he is not worth much.

I really don’t see any team giving up solid major league talent to acquire Kemp now. The offseason? Maybe, if he ends this year strong. But then that goes back to my original point. Prospects are just as high a risk as Kemp is and therefore are more likely to be what is dealt for him.

If a team is making the deal to improve themselves for next year, they could deal expiring contracts and some prospects. A starter and a few relievers and maybe a rh bench bat (just talking I have no idea what the Dodgers need). The sort of bit parts that can bring a championship. I don’t think he’s that high a risk, but you are right, you’d probably get more in the offseason. The issue is he seems to be making trouble, and there is clearly a logjam in the outfield. Add the contract and none of that comes together as someone you’ll get a ton for. It may not matter if you wait. He may not get the power stroke back at which point, he’ll lose what little value he had. I still think with 15 hrs a season and a .280 average he’s a solid player, no one you’d get a ton for but a solid player.

Pretty much anybody who is available represents an upgrade over Kemp right now. He has been worth -0.3 fWAR and -1.1 rWAR this year. His bat has been pretty good, but his baserunning has been below average and his defense has been terrible. He was never a good fielder, but he has now become an absolute liability with the glove and it takes away any value he generates with the bat.

I will never accept any trade argument based on WAR or the so called advanced defensive metrics. You also leave out all of the factors that actually matter (including, for instance, his very slow start due to recovery from multiple injuries) and the “pretty much anybody” argument isn’t worth a thing unless you name a name.

Matt Kemp has always had a reputation as a poor fielder. Even his own GM has called him out for his poor defense in the past and that was pre-injuries that seem to have sapped him of his speed. He has also been benched by his manager for poor defense this season and moved from the position he has always played due to defense. The fact that all advanced defensive stats rate him as a terrible defender and I’m not sure why you don’t trust the “so called advanced defensive metrics” with regard to Kemp.

As for WAR, I chose this stat since it is the only measure we have for a players total contribution to winning, including hitting, base running and defense. He is an above average hitter, who plays terrible defense and is a below average base runner. I’m not sure what you’re talking about his poor start, because May and July have been his worst offensive months, April was his second best.

Willingham, Byrd and Zobrist are three better options who have been better players this year and don’t come with that albatross of a contract that Kemp has.

Actually he hasn’t, but you can argue metrics or some other form evaluation all day long, but it never answers the question how Kemp’s agent makes an argument for him playing CF for Boston or some other team, when I’m not hearing anyone making it for him playing that position for LA.

As a Red Sox fan I would be interested in getting Kemp but I hear you contending teams don’t trade one of their star players in the middle of a season in which they are contending. I mean Kemp isn’t having a great year but if he still has difference making ability.

I would like to see Terr Ryan take a chance on Kemp, we need a CF till Buxton is ready. Then Kemp could move to a Corner and DH some to save his legs. I would be willing to trade any 2 bullpen guy’s other than Perkins, Correia, plus maybe a few AA guys. Kemp could add spark to our lineup.

There are lots of similarities between Matt Kemp’s extension and Joe Mauer’s. Both were signed after breakout seasons at age 26 that could never be repeated. The length, AAV, and declining production/ injuries that ensued after they signed are eerily similar. Now both fanbases want them out of town.

Giants have financial flexibility because of the $2m they are paying Peavy? PLEASE…. they have more than enough money to get more players, but they’re too stingy. Expensive food, and extensive sellout games, but you don’t wanna spend?